Ok, I have to really question the development habits/cycle of this
project at this point... Why is this guy recommending a version that's
not on the official site, and further, he writes the fix has to do
with
the OP's original problem. Wasn't' it just last night he was
blaming it
on dns? Wth?...
Sorry about earlier Jake, nothing personal, I don't use qtp, nor did I
do "due diligence" , but in the absence of any developer reply, I was
hoping someone may clarify if I put it that way, so thank you .
Personally, I knew NOONE on earth would be foolish enough to write a
utility that breaks sa of course, I was trying to make the OP
understand
that a simple update of sa-config would never do such harm.
I run qmt , not qtp, and to be brutally honest, it's only because I
had
to move my qmail server quickly and could not rebuild it from scratch
net-qmail src etc. I joined this list to get some idea of who uses
this
stuff more than needing help, and to keep up with any updates.
I guess what *truly* amazes me about this mailing list is that
there are
soooo many clueless noobs running these setups as a "real" business..
that's frightening... When I first learned "straight" qmail back in
'02
and had asked even 50% of the types of questions I see here on a
weekly
basis (especially, "Help, my customers are whining and im
clueless!"), I
would get no reply at all, a swift and terse "RTFM" and either a
link to
qmail.org, or the proper RFC/archive post.
Point being, it's incredibly complex industrial-grade MTA software
that
is bundled here... Making it simple for "everyday" people to run an
MTA
is not always a good thing - it may be good for mail admins who know
what they are doing (Right everyone, you all do know Email and what
RFC822 is correct, ? :), but not necessarily for "just anybody with a
linux shell/server and a static IP with dns"... Tell me, does this
bother you at all? How do you know your software is not abused by
professional spammers? I know if I decided to become one, I would
probably be here in a second. Hey, no *real* learning of the mta
software necessary? Perfect, spams-awwwwaaay!! :)
Lastly, how is this project perceived by the qmail-users mail list
folks? This is an open question to anyone who helps develop this
qtp/qmt
stuff, as I'm simply curious. Do they consider it to be "highly
bastardized, unsupported, and not recommended", just as "qmail
rocks" is
? ...
Can anyone address these questions , especially the apparent lack of
version control/builds, as evidenced below, to convince me this is
something worth staying with, because right now it looks about as
well-kept/organized as the current White House... :-P
Cheers!
jamie
-----Original Message-----
From: Roxanne Sandesara [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 6:09 PM
To: qmailtoaster-list@qmailtoaster.com
Subject: Re: [qmailtoaster] Re: Soft Rejections
OK. Should probably put 1.3.14 on the website, then. So that qtp-
newmodel and other upgrades don't run into the same problem.
Interesting. That directory is the one that was coming up as part of
my 'issues'.
I'm afraid I'm not quite up to 'spec file mod' level status. Is it at
all possible that the correction for 1.3.14 would lead to a change
somewhere in some portion of the includes or the files for the
binaries for Spamassassin which would then convince the system to
look for the .pre files in that location rather than /etc/mail/
spamassassin ?
Roxanne
On May 8, 2008, at 5:59 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:
Use 1.3.14. It contains a bug fix in the spec file (otherwise
they're the
same). The bug it fixes is:
install: cannot create regular file
`/var/tmp/spamassassin-toaster-root/etc/mail/spamassassin/
local.cf.bz2': No
such file or directory
Roxanne Sandesara wrote:
I do have a question. When the last Spamassassin-toaster package
came
out, there were problems. This was then followed by a thread that
included a package Eric put together that was version 3.2.4 release
1.3.14. I have that package. But the QMT website is only showing
release
1.3.13.
Should I do a rebuild with release 1.3.14's src.rpm? Or should I DL
release 1.3.13's src.rpm and build that instead?
Roxanne
On May 8, 2008, at 12:59 PM, Roxanne Sandesara wrote:
To be clear, I was not blaming Jake, or his utilities. I've had
great
luck with everything Jake has ever done or offered. I was merely
answering the question of how it was I'd installed sa-update.
I'm also not really sure that the executables themselves /have/
been
messed up. It's possible. They might be. Or they might be pulling
in
data from some other included file that is incorrect. I just can't
/find/ that other file.
I also can't quite fathom how, if the executables had been messed
up
during the installation - which also happened this prior weekend
- how
things managed to run just fine until yesterday afternoon. My
suspicion would have been that some run of some cron job or
another
ended up altering some file or another to put in this incorrect
path
and create the issue. But I really have no clue. I'm fishing in
the dark.
Nevertheless. I will try, as stated, to DL the latest SA src.rpm,
rebuild, and re-install when I get a chance, either late tonight
or
this coming weekend.
I do appreciate all of the help I received trying to narrow down
what
was going on and how to get things back up and running.
Roxanne
On May 8, 2008, at 12:49 PM, Jake Vickers wrote:
James Pratt wrote:
Ah, ok... that explains it ... So whoever wrote this qtp-sa-
update
deserves a smackdown... What are they thinking by touching the
SA
executables ? That is just *very* bad (I would dare say *evil*
;)
programming... :\
Note to others: Configure sa-update's using these instructions -
simple,
to the point, and it wont' touch your binaries/scripts...
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/RuleUpdates
... and for ditching RDJ, there is openprotect.com's SARE rule
channel:
http://saupdates.openprotect.com/
I'm just jumping in on the tail of this, but you can try and
give me
the smack down if you want. Or you can quit using the software I
write.
qtp-sa-update does not touch the SA executables at all. I don't
even
know where you would get the idea if you even looked at the
script. I
think if you do your due diligence you'll see the script does
almost
exactly what the 2 links you provided do almost step by step.
Looking at the error, it looks like a remnant left over from
when the
spamassassin-toaster package spec file was broken or at least
acting
weird.
I'd suggest rebuilding the package (spamassassin-toaster). It
looks
like you got one of the many bugs reported on the list by this
latest
version or revert to an older version.
(to recap: the qtp-sa-update script removed the RDJ rules if they
were there from an older version of QTP, then installs the
Apache/Spamassassin channel, then installs the OpenProtect
channel.
It doesn't touch the executable at all)
--
-Eric 'shubes'
---------------------------------------------------------------------
QmailToaster hosted by: VR Hosted <http://www.vr.org>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: qmailtoaster-list-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: qmailtoaster-list-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
QmailToaster hosted by: VR Hosted <http://www.vr.org>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: qmailtoaster-list-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: qmailtoaster-list-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
QmailToaster hosted by: VR Hosted <http://www.vr.org>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: qmailtoaster-list-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
